I'm wary of people who have "done their own research" and "have done the math" and come up with conclusions that both support their presuppositions (LIBERTY!!!) and disagree with a scientific consensus (Global warming from anthropomorphic activity).
DeGraaf says "And if you look at evaporation in the cycle, evaporation removes the heat of all of the hydrocarbons that we use. Conservatively, they remove all of the heat of all of the hydrocarbons used globally.in about 30 seconds per day, less than 30 seconds per day." That frankly seems incredible to me.
Do you suppose you could interview someone within the consensus view who would be able to comment on at least some of the math that DeGraaf has done?
I'm wary of people who have "done their own research" and "have done the math" and come up with conclusions that both support their presuppositions (LIBERTY!!!) and disagree with a scientific consensus (Global warming from anthropomorphic activity).
DeGraaf says "And if you look at evaporation in the cycle, evaporation removes the heat of all of the hydrocarbons that we use. Conservatively, they remove all of the heat of all of the hydrocarbons used globally.in about 30 seconds per day, less than 30 seconds per day." That frankly seems incredible to me.
Do you suppose you could interview someone within the consensus view who would be able to comment on at least some of the math that DeGraaf has done?
There are a ton of debates out there by people on both sides of this issue. And what happens is truly unknown until we get that warm.
Now if he said we're not getting warmer, that I would have challenged him on. Because it's a fact that the earth is warmer.